1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Energy and restrictions

  1. Apr 1, 2013 #1
    I'm trying to simulate a long chain of atoms where I restrict the bond (length between two consecutive atoms) and angle (between three consecutive atoms). Therefore, if I want to simulate N particles, then I have N+3 degrees of freedom. The only interactions between atoms is due to Lennard-Jones Potential.
    I am using the classical Runge-Kutta fourth order method to integrate the equations. But, I got that the energy is always decreasing and then it keeps constant, like in the picture shown below.

    http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/3757/examplexy.png [Broken]

    What can I do to keep constant the energy ?

    What is happening ? I'm new with the topic. My english is not that good, so if you do not understand something, just let me know it.
    Thanks !
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 1, 2013 #2

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What velocity dependent forces do you have exactelly? If you have Coriolis forces then you are obviously in a rotating frame. To get energy conservation in a rotating frame you have to include the potential energy due to the inertial centrifugal force. If the angular velocity of the frame is not constant, you cant expect energy to be consereved at all.
     
  4. Apr 2, 2013 #3
    No, I don't have velocity dependent forces, because my only forces are due to a Lennard-Jones Potential. I was a little confused. What I do really have is a rotating frame. Got it. I was not including the potential energy due to inertial centrifugal force. I was just including, kinetick energies ([itex] \dfrac{1}{2}mv^2 [/itex]) and the corresponding LJ potential. However, these velocities are the global velocities of the particles.

    Thanks !
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2013
  5. Apr 2, 2013 #4

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    In a rotating frame you have inertial forces too (Centrifugal and Coriolis). And Coriolis is velocity dependent, but it is not doing any work, so it is irrelevant for Energy conservation.
    To make an energy analysis you have to transform every thing into one frame.
     
  6. Apr 2, 2013 #5

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Can you post your program?
     
  7. Apr 2, 2013 #6
    Yeah, I compute all the velocities to one frame, my global frame.
     
  8. Apr 2, 2013 #7

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    And that global frame is rotating?
     
  9. Apr 2, 2013 #8
    No. It is not rotating.
     
  10. Apr 2, 2013 #9
    Yeah, off corse. But what part ? There many lines of code.
     
  11. Apr 2, 2013 #10

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    How do you implement the constraints?
     
  12. Apr 2, 2013 #11
    By setting every positiion in terms of those coordinates I mentioned before? I don't understand the question.
     
  13. Apr 2, 2013 #12

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I was asking about this
    I took "restrict" to mean that you had constraints of the bond lengths and angles.

    Do I understand correctly that you don't have an angular potential? Do you calculate the Lennard-Jones potential over all particle pairs?
     
  14. Apr 2, 2013 #13
    Yes. I do not have an angular potential. And I calculate Lennard Jones potential over all particle pairs, except those that have an angle or a bond.

    In fact, in the most simple case, with [itex] M [/itex] chains and 2 particles for every chain, I get the same thing.

    In fact, can we only discuss this particular case ? To see what is going on here.
     
  15. Apr 2, 2013 #14

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Before we get into the particulars, I have a couple more questions.

    Do you use a cutoff for the LJ potential?

    Have you tired changing the time step?
     
  16. Apr 2, 2013 #15
    Yeah I am tired changin the time step. And I'm not using a cutoff for the LJ potential.
     
  17. Apr 2, 2013 #16

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What is the smallest possible system you can simulate and what are the results then?
     
  18. Apr 2, 2013 #17

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'll try to have a look at all that tomorrow.
     
  19. Apr 2, 2013 #18

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What are F, fLJ and m here?
     
  20. Apr 2, 2013 #19
    [itex]F_i^j[/itex] is the resultant force over the particle [itex]i[/itex] in the [itex]j[/itex]-chain. [itex]f_{LJ}[/itex] is the corresponding magnitude.
     
  21. Apr 2, 2013 #20

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The magnitude of what? And what is m?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook